Razz: Huge pot
 

No reads on villains because its the first razz orbit since they sat down. Is the jamming justified or did i do too much? I tried to force the third guy out but it didn't work.

7th is a valuebet once both of them check, because they won't ever fold in a pot of this size, right?

HORSE - Razz ($3/$6), Ante $0.25, Bring-In $1 (converter)

3rd Street - (0.58 SB)

Seat 2: xx xx K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]___brings-in___calls
Seat 3: xx xx T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]___folds
Seat 4: xx xx 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]___folds
Hero: A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]___raises
Seat 6: xx xx 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]___calls
Seat 7: xx xx T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]___calls
Seat 8: xx xx T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]___folds

4th Street - (4.58 SB)

Seat 2: xx xx K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]___raises___raises
Hero: A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]___raises___calls
Seat 6: xx xx 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]___folds
Seat 7: xx xx T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]___bets___calls___calls

5th Street - (8.29 BB)

Seat 2: xx xx K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]___bets___raises___calls
Hero: A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]___raises___raises
Seat 7: xx xx T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]___checks___calls___calls

6th Street - (20.29 BB)

Seat 2: xx xx K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]___calls
Hero: A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]___calls
Seat 7: xx xx T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]___bets

River - (23.29 BB)

Seat 2: xx xx K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] xx___checks___calls
Hero: A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]___bets
Seat 7: xx xx T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] xx___checks___calls

Total pot: (26.29 BB)

Re: Razz: Huge pot
 

everything seems fine, nh

Re: Razz: Huge pot
 

Why are we reraising 4th?

I'm not arguing with it, just curious.

Is it to isolate vs the king which we have beat? Are we actually a favourite at that point?

Re: Razz: Huge pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why are we reraising 4th?

I'm not arguing with it, just curious.

Is it to isolate vs the king which we have beat? Are we actually a favourite at that point?

[/ QUOTE ]
Can you say 3-sided coin flip? You're going to get the pot HU here very rarely considering the action, so might as well put on the brakes and save a little deception.

Re: Razz: Huge pot
 

i would jam 4rth because in most cases its a coin flip, but there will be cases where 1 player is calling rough, if so, then you prolly have a small equity edge and should build the pot.

now if i'm totally wrong here some1 please step in & correct me, i don't wanna go around giving erroneous advice

Re: Razz: Huge pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
Can you say 3-sided coin flip? You're going to get the pot HU here very rarely considering the action, so might as well put on the brakes and save a little deception.

[/ QUOTE ]I think you're giving them too much credit by that hand range.

The mere fact that they played with a T and K as upcards makes it many times more likely they would play very non-smooth hands than usual due to either being terrible or not realizing what game they're playing.

So I think we do have some equity edge on average. I'm not sure when you think any deception gained by calling would pay off.

And the three-bet may well have had the effect of knocking out a player with good equity, since 44 folded. So there certainly seem to be some utility to that.

Anyone else considering raising 6th?

There's some small possibility of the low board being paired and a lot of equity in getting rid of KQ63. And there's also some possibility of him playing another game and drawing dead, in which case it's a valuebet.

I'm leaning towards it not being such a good idea, but with a 20BB pot gaining even a little extra equity is huge.

Re: Razz: Huge pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
7th is a valuebet once both of them check, because they won't ever fold in a pot of this size, right?

[/ QUOTE ]I have a question. I'm trying to figure out why you would "value bet" what might very easily be the worst hand? I mean, you have an 8, no one's board is giving away a ton of info, checking doesn't mean they have no hand, they just aren't sure what everyone has. Any 85 on up beats you.

Seat 2 raised on 4th with what was, at the moment, the worst hand. So I'd be giving him credit for A2-type hole cards. When he raises again on 5th, I'm thinking he has a pretty good 6 draw. (Unless this was .50/1, in which case he could have a King and a pair and do the same thing!) Anyway, I may not understand the concept, but I thought value-betting referred to believing oneself in the lead and trying to get paid off. So, if you thought you were in the lead, why did you think that?

Re: Razz: Huge pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think you're giving them too much credit by that hand range.

The mere fact that they played with a T and K as upcards makes it many times less likely they would play very non-smooth hands than usual except when not realizing what game they're playing.

[/ QUOTE ]
FYP

[ QUOTE ]
So I think we do have some equity edge on average. I'm not sure when you think any deception gained by calling would pay off.

[/ QUOTE ]
Please see this post for the answer.

Re: Razz: Huge pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
7th is a valuebet once both of them check, because they won't ever fold in a pot of this size, right?

[/ QUOTE ]I have a question. I'm trying to figure out why you would "value bet" what might very easily be the worst hand? I mean, you have an 8, no one's board is giving away a ton of info, checking doesn't mean they have no hand, they just aren't sure what everyone has. Any 85 on up beats you.

Seat 2 raised on 4th with what was, at the moment, the worst hand. So I'd be giving him credit for A2-type hole cards. When he raises again on 5th, I'm thinking he has a pretty good 6 draw. (Unless this was .50/1, in which case he could have a King and a pair and do the same thing!) Anyway, I may not understand the concept, but I thought value-betting referred to believing oneself in the lead and trying to get paid off. So, if you thought you were in the lead, why did you think that?

[/ QUOTE ]
3/6 HORSE plays like 0,5/1 at times [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Seat 7 obviously is no danger. He bet 6th and would certainly bet a 7 on 7th. After his check, i strongly think seat 2 should bet any decent hand because the danger of me checking behind when i miss is too big but i will pay off a lot if i catch a nine or a ten. And he is an aggressive player as shown by his marginal jamming on the earlier streets. So i figured that i have a decent chance of having the best hand, plus i risk one bet to win two because both this guy will pay off if they hit anything T or better because i could be bluffing given my board.

Re: Razz: Huge pot
 

The results by the way were just awesome:

Seat 7 had A7____J ,bet 6th with his two pair and paif off 7th with jack high.

Seat 2 had 24____K and overcalled 7th with Q high.

Re: Razz: Huge pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
The results by the way were just awesome:

Seat 7 had A7____J ,bet 6th with his two pair and paif off 7th with jack high.

Seat 2 had 24____K and overcalled 7th with Q high.

[/ QUOTE ]
In that case, my prescription is for you to spend every waking minute at this table and sit out the other 4 games if you have to. Oh, and value bet your 8's.

Re: Razz: Huge pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
FYP

[/ QUOTE ]Nope.

A good player has 0% of playing something like K92, someone willing to play with a K showing has much, much higher probability than that. Certainly someone thinking any K looks good, let alone one as a doorcard, is going to "hm" when seeing K93, or whatever.

Yeah, their hole cards are weighted towards wheel cards. But that doesn't mean we can exclude other hands completely, and every time they hold something really horrible we make out like bandits.

Obviously, they're more likely to have wheelcards when showing a high door card than when showing an ace. But that's a fairly trivial point, and I thought it obivous I was talking about different kind of players rather than the same kind of players showing different kind of door cards. And a player willing to play showing a K is far more likely to play K97 than a random player.

So the fact we should take into consideration when thinking about their ranges isn't that they're showing high cards; it's that they're the kind of player willing to go on with a high card showing. And that range isn't wheel cards only, since the type of players willing to do that includes a high proportion of maniacs, and people playing the wrong game.

[ QUOTE ]
Please see this post for the answer.

[/ QUOTE ]The situation you linked to isn't even a little bit similiar since this is a big multiway pot and two players have shown they will call utterly insane hands with a third one that very well may have something you'd like to knock out.

You also seem to ignore that it's impossible to be in bad shape here, but possible to be in great shape due to someone playing a pair of kings. So from that perspective raising is a freeroll.

There's also the point that for whatever reason these people simply aren't playing anywhere near rationally. What they have shown is that they're willing to call a lot of bets with really bad hands. Which isn't an argument for trying to get them to bluff.

Re: Razz: Huge pot
 

I see. If your reads are indicative of your experience at HORSE tables then by all means keep playing them religiously and you should be a big winner vs. villains who raise with a split pair of K's in razz.

Re: Razz: Huge pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
I see. If your reads are indicative of your experience at HORSE tables then by all means keep playing them religiously and you should be a big winner vs. villains who raise with a split pair of K's in razz.

[/ QUOTE ]Reads haven't much to do with it, I just explained why your proposed hand range was too tight.

It has much more to do with logic than observation. And the logic is that when you're dealing with someone who has shown himself to commit one obvious, super big mistake the probability of him commiting other similiarly large mistakes shoot up dramatically. It's not reasonable to assume that the demonstrated mistake is the absolute worst one he'll commit.

You're essentially saying "We know they have to at least play wwK and wwT, but surely they can't be worse." whereas I'm saying "we know they play at least wwK and wwT and that dramatically raises the probability they play even worse hands".

It's the same reasoning in hold'em. If you see someone playing T7o early it doesn't mean he'll go all the way to 72o, but it makes very much more likely than if you hadn't seen him play T7 at all.

And you still haven't addressed 44 behind us. Which on further reflection looks way more important than getting the hand ranges right.

Just looking at it quickly it seems pretty clear that getting rid of something like 8544 gains us significant equity even with your proposed range. And if you don't think that hands like that will be more inclined to fold due to a 3-bet, then we have an argument for valuebetting even with assumed smooth draws for K6 and T8.

If we we're talking about capping, you'd have much more of an argument for refraining from betting. I'd still do it, but whatever expectation that bet would have, it would be lower than 3-betting in this spot.

Re: Razz: Huge pot
 

[ QUOTE ]
After his check, i strongly think seat 2 should bet any decent hand because the danger of me checking behind when i miss is too big but i will pay off a lot if i catch a nine or a ten.

[/ QUOTE ]Thanks, well-explained, even I understood it. Low limits are full of what I call holdem refugees, who all think the check/raise is da bomb. I don't value-bet much against unknown players. But I didn't think of the "risk of opponent folding" scenario in this way before. Some say "only a better hand will call you" but that hasn't been my experience. I find river play the most difficult.